Fellow atheists... Where does the Human Mind come from?

[1137]

You missed the point my friend.
Bob can see the predictions on the screen.

The machine will make it's prediction based on what it has calculated, but Bob can see the result, but the machine already knows that he sees the result, so it includes that into the equasion, but then agian Bob can still see the result...

In other words:
The machine knows that he knows that it knows that he knows that it knows that he knows... Infinitely... Hence infinite regression.

No. The machine calculates Bob's future including him viewing and trying to change the machine's calculations. Then, in trying to change those outcomes, he'll make those outcomes come about anyways. Though this assumes the mind is the whole universe and ignores the external universe. You'd need to run calculations on every bit of matter in the cosmos to predict exactly how Bob's life will go. This machine can simply predict how Bob will act in certain situations perfectly.

 

[dust1n]

You missed the point my friend.
Bob can see the predictions on the screen.

The machine will make it's prediction based on what it has calculated, but Bob can see the result, but the machine already knows that he sees the result, so it includes that into the equasion, but then agian Bob can still see the result...

In other words:
The machine knows that he knows that it knows that he knows that it knows that he knows... Infinitely... Hence infinite regression.

Interesting concept, but the human mind isn't capable of infinite regression, while a computer is. Computers have the upper hand (well, in the future, they will).

 

[Penumbra]

The question is best stated as: If the mind doesn't stem from the brain, where does it come from?

Here I will base my aegument on the belief that if the mind actually do stem from the brain, then it is deterministic... Extremely complex, but non the leas systematic and predictable given enough information. Which is a fair assumption to me.

Now to the argument:
Assume the human mind to be deterministic.
Then, in theory, a machine capable of predicting every future event, whether human or natural, given pre-conditions, can exist.

Given enough pre-conditions, this machine has a 100% certainity rate.

Now assume a test subject named Bob. Bob is isolated from the outside world, i.e. he is unaffected by any outside uncontrolled event.

We gather every information there is about Bob, complete map of information about every last atom in his body and surroundong test invironment at a goven moment and feed them into the machine.

Bob, being an your avarage human being, is under the illusion that he has free well, which is negated by our assumption that his mind is deterministic by nature.

Our machine is capable of predicting Bob's future actions with perfect precision.

Now Bob is introduced to the machine so he can read its predictions. Being under the illusion of free well, Bob will try to change his actions so he can prove he has it, and the machine is wrong. The machine already has calculated that Bob will do that, since it has all the information needed to make a 100% certain prediction... Hence infinite regression is created.

Therefor, the human mind is indeterministic by nature, and since it is indeterministic, then it doesn't stem from the brain "solely"... So where does it come from?

No souls or spirits please, because that will drift the thread way off into a completely different subject...

There's a contradiction to say that the machine can predict with perfect precision what the person will do, and that it will show the result to the person and add uncertainty to it. If it predicts with perfect precision what Bob will do then it already took into account that it will show the result to Bob and knows what Bob will do with that information, otherwise it's not perfect precision. So this is a sloppy use of either words or logic because you're claiming it's perfectly precise but then later giving Bob the opportunity to choose something else.

Pick one.

 

[viole]

The question is best stated as: If the mind doesn't stem from the brain, where does it come from?

Here I will base my aegument on the belief that if the mind actually do stem from the brain, then it is deterministic... Extremely complex, but non the leas systematic and predictable given enough information. Which is a fair assumption to me.

Now to the argument:
Assume the human mind to be deterministic.
Then, in theory, a machine capable of predicting every future event, whether human or natural, given pre-conditions, can exist.

Given enough pre-conditions, this machine has a 100% certainity rate.

Now assume a test subject named Bob. Bob is isolated from the outside world, i.e. he is unaffected by any outside uncontrolled event.

We gather every information there is about Bob, complete map of information about every last atom in his body and surroundong test invironment at a goven moment and feed them into the machine.

Bob, being an your avarage human being, is under the illusion that he has free well, which is negated by our assumption that his mind is deterministic by nature.

Our machine is capable of predicting Bob's future actions with perfect precision.

Now Bob is introduced to the machine so he can read its predictions. Being under the illusion of free well, Bob will try to change his actions so he can prove he has it, and the machine is wrong. The machine already has calculated that Bob will do that, since it has all the information needed to make a 100% certain prediction... Hence infinite regression is created.

Therefor, the human mind is indeterministic by nature, and since it is indeterministic, then it doesn't stem from the brain "solely"... So where does it come from?

No souls or spirits please, because that will drift the thread way off into a completely different subject...

There is a loose end here.

To simplify things, let's suppose that Bob is a simple digital inverter. When his input is a 0, his output will be 1, and the other way round.

So, if he gets an input sequence like 011001, its output will be 100110. It is obvious that Bob is deterministic, and creating a machine that behaves like Bob is trivial and trivially deterministic as well.

Now, the machine can anticipate the outcome of Bob ONLY when it precisely knows the sequence of input that Bob will see and that exact sequence is input into the machine. So, that will work when Bob and the machine see the same things.

But when you couple them, this will become impossible. By letting the machine compute the future output of Bob and send it back to Bob's present, clearly change the initial input sequence that Bob will see, invalidating thereby the machine's initial predictions.

For instance, if I send 10 to Bob, the machine will compute 01 for Bob result. That is, it will send 1 to Bob as what it is expected from him after the first 1. That is, Bob will receive 11, against the premise of receiving 10.

The fact that this cannot be logically achieved by coupling two obviously deterministic entities, is not sufficient in order to conclude that at at least one of them is not deterministic.

Ciao

- viole